Tag Archives: Larceny

Where a defendant agreed to do home improvement work, cashed the customers’ deposit check, performed a few days of minimal work that was not to their satisfaction and then abandoned the job, his conviction of larceny over $250 by false ...

Where a judge found a defendant guilty of larceny from a person 60 years of age or older, the judge applied an incorrect burden of proof, so the conviction must be vacated and a new trial ordered. “Our review of ...

Where a defendant was convicted at a bench trial of larceny under $250 for the theft of steel pipes and metal plates from a construction site, the judge (1) understood the law of the affirmative defense of mistake of fact and abandonment in the context of a larceny charge and (2) correctly applied that law in finding the defendant guilty on the evidence presented.

Where the defendant was convicted of larceny of property over $250 by false pretenses when he failed to repay a loan, the conviction must be reversed because there was insufficient evidence that the statements the defendant made to the complainant at the time of the loan transaction were knowingly false.

Where this court on July 20 denied motions for summary judgment filed by the defendant debtor and his former wife (the plaintiff), that order should be vacated and replaced with an order awarding the plaintiff summary judgment.

Where the defendant moves to dismiss charges of obtaining a signature by false pretenses and larceny over $250 from an elderly person, (1) there was sufficient evidence for the both charges of the indictment and (2) the integrity of the jury was not impaired.

Where a defendant has been convicted of larceny over $50, we hold that the conviction must be overturned because the trial judge erred in not holding a hearing in order to determine whether a juror had been sleeping during trial.

Where a defendant Springfield police officer was found guilty of three counts of larceny over $250, the convictions should stand, as the trial judge did not err in preventing the defendant from bringing out on cross-examination that the victims were undocumented immigrants and that they were not in proper possession of Social Security numbers.

Where (1) evidence has been introduced that the defendant, a former police chief, knew he received extra pay for Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) certification and training, submitted payroll requests for the pay and obtained re-certification without attending the re-certification classes and (2) the defendant has not met his burden of showing selective prosecution, I will deny his motion to dismiss an indictment charging him with procurement fraud and larceny.